1. Field of the Invention
This technology relates to physical ports for 100 Gigabit Ethernet networking equipment.
2. Description of Related Art
Designs for 100 Gigabit Ethernet networking equipment generally include one of two physical ports, the CFP MSA (C Form-factor Pluggable MultiSource Agreement) and the CXP standard (C eXtended-capability Pluggable form factor), where C can indicate the Roman numeral for 100, corresponding to 100 Gigabit.
The CFP MultiSource agreement is an industry standard that supports various different fiber optic interconnects, including 100 G Base LR4, 100 G Base SR10 and 100 G Base LR10. These fiber optic interconnects support short haul (100 m) or long haul (10 km) connections at price points between ranging between $10,000 to $25,000. Despite these high costs, 100 Gigabit Ethernet networking equipment includes CFP ports as the only industry option for long haul connections.
The alternative to CFP is CXP. CXP has a huge cost advantage, since it supports passive copper connections using cables that cost less than $200. The drawback is that there are no long haul optical options available to CXP. Even the optical implementations of CXP are limited to 100 m or less.
Designs for 100 Gigabit Ethernet networking equipment could include both a CFP port and a CXP port, but this approach has disadvantages. First, this approach greatly increases the complexity and cost of the PCB (printed circuit board) interconnects inside the device, because of the many required fast data multiplexers to switch between the CFP port and the CXP port. This approach also takes up additional physical space on the front panel of the equipment. In many networking devices, port density and front panel space is at a premium, discouraging this approach. Also for this reason, any approach should require as few ports as possible.
An existing solution uses an optical interface module and optical cable costing in excess of about $20,000. Such high costs discourage and slow the adoption of 100 Gigabit networking equipment. It would be desirable if such costly optical solutions could be replaced with a cheaper alternative, that in turn would speed adoption of 100 Gigabit networking equipment. Another existing solution is limited to 40 Gbps (gigabits per second) and is unable to compensate for the varied attenuation of different lengths of cable.